Australia has very strict legislation governing what you can and cannot do in the name of advertising. It's called the Trade Practices Act and operates at the Federal level. This isn't just a bunch of grumpy customers; on the face of it Apple could well be in breach of Commonwealth legislation.

The ads Apple have been running here have clearly stated its 4G credentials which the average consumer (not just the "ignorant, uneducated" variety that you rather condescendingly describe) could reasonably expect to be of some use on the 4G network we do, in fact, have here. Instead, it of no use whatsoever at this time. Customers should be able to purchase a product or service and expect it to be able to perform as advertised. The 4G connectivity simply won't do that here so Apple, sadly, is likely to be in breach and, if so, will need to take remedial action.

To use an analogy, how would a US consumer feel about being sold a PAL television set only to be told "it works fine in Australia"?

Listen PAL, you're actually totally right. If Apple is running TV ads in Australia that claim 4G, then they should definitely stop.

You just took what I said out of context. I said "elsewhere in the country", not "elsewhere" (in general). There's a big difference when you're operating just within the confines of one country and its laws.

I pointed out that you've acknowledged the device has the capability to connect to certain network types but is not stating that certain network types are automatically available everywhere. Apple has also stated this on their website.

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Seriously, this is like the "does it or does it not support 3G" issue all over again. I give Apple two years tops before they release a quad- or penta-band LTE iPad that'll make the majority happy.

It was only in 2010 that the first penta-band 3G phone shipped. That was from Nokia. Apple was 2nd with the iPhone 4 that year. That's a very long time between 3G existing and the first pent-band chips being used.

So now we have an issue where even in 2012 the MDM9610 can only support 2 LTE bands at one time. We can infer this because if it could support 3 LTE bands then Apple could have reduced the number of iPad WiFi+4G models by 6 by making one that supports both Verizon and AT&T's 2G, 3G and 4G networks.

Will the upcoming MDM9615 support more than 2 LTE bands? I can't find any info on it. How many bands will be needed to support all networks in all countries implementing LTE? So far we have two different 700 MHz bands and 2100 Mhz in the US. There are also 800, 1700, 1800, 1900, 2600 MHz bands that I'm aware of. That's at least 8 bands and likely a lot more when you consider how you can have multiple frequency bands that use different operating bands.

I hope Apple and Qualcomm have planned for this or the iPhone will not be "world mode" when it comes to LTE and they might see themselves having to create a different physical model for multiple countries for the first time.

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

I pointed out that you've acknowledged the device has the capability to connect to certain network types but is not stating that certain network types are automatically available everywhere. Apple has also stated this on their website.

You're missing my point. Yes, I have acknowledged that it has the capability to connect to certain network types, but in the case of LTE in Australia, it does not have the capability to connect at all. Apple should not be marketing the iPad from an international "one size fits all" perspective.

While operating in Australia, they should be abiding by the country's trading laws. There's no point saying "hey, here's the iPad Wi-Fi + 4G", and then clarifying through fine print; that just won't cut it. Most consumers will not easily see this in advertising and packaging. Like I said earlier, legally, Australian consumers have their statutory rights, both written and implied, so in seeing how Apple has marketed the iPad, they should reasonably expect it to be able to connect to Telstra's LTE network. But it does not - hence why the ACCC has jumped in.

Look, all the stuff I've seen on AI, Ars, MacRumors, TUAW and so on have been written from a very US-centric perspective. Being an Australian, I thought I'd jump in and clarify just how things work in this country. Whether or not you choose to accept it is another matter. It's clear that we both have our points of view and that we're just going around in circles, so how about we just leave it at that? <handshakes all around>

Look, all the stuff I've seen on AI, Ars, MacRumors, TUAW and so on have been written from a very US-centric perspective. Being an Australian, I thought I'd jump in and clarify just how things work in this country. Whether or not you choose to accept it is another matter. It's clear that we both have our points of view and that we're just going around in circles, so how about we just leave it at that?

What haven't I accepted? I've clearly stated that it would behoove Apple to follow the laws of a country that has chosen to define what is 4G even if it's silly, irrational and goes against the ITU's definition. That does not mean that Apple's nomenclature is misleading. If the Australian courts have said that only LTE is 4G and that for a device to be called 4G it has to be able to connect to Australia's LTE network then so be it, but it still doesn't change the fact that Apple is not lying about the claims of the iPad's capability.

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

What i have been told is that the chipset Apple is using doesn't support the other bands that some markets are installing. Is there a chipset that supports ALL of the different bands for all of the different technology that is currently in use or planned to be rolled out?

This is so dumb, anybody with a brain would realize that the iPad is 4G capable, it has 4G modem circuitry inside, that means IF THERE IS a 4G network available, it will operate at 4G speed. A consumer should know that the Australian networks are not 4G LTE before they buy the iPad....they could take it on a trip to the USA anytime and use it on America's 4G LTE networks -- the iPad IS 4G-capable!! yes....but if the network infrastructure is not there to support it, that functionality will not work. This should be known from the start, this is NOT some con by Apple, it is just simply ignorant, uneducated consumers who don't know anything about electronics or wireless technology or how networks work and operate. The EQUIPMENT (towers, antennas, and routers) have to be in place for a 4G network to work, and that kind of network simply isn't being offered in Aussie-land yet. But the 4G iPad IS a 4G iPad true and true. No deception by Apple.

They sold it as Wifi + 4G when it never worked on 4G. Why would someone goto the US and pay your stupid data rates just to use 4G.

Their advertising it in the UK as 4G and half my friends who got one now think its gonna get 72Mbps download.

What i have been told is that the chipset Apple is using doesn't support the other bands that some markets are installing. Is there a chipset that supports ALL of the different bands for all of the different technology that is currently in use or planned to be rolled out?

What i have been told is that the chipset Apple is using doesn't support the other bands that some markets are installing. Is there a chipset that supports ALL of the different bands for all of the different technology that is currently in use or planned to be rolled out?

There's chipsets that support all bands of GSM and HSPA, which is in the iPad, but LTE isn't finished.

What haven't I accepted? I've clearly stated that it would behoove Apple to follow the laws of a country that has chosen to define what is 4G even if it's silly, irrational and goes against the ITU's definition. That does not mean that Apple's nomenclature is misleading. If the Australian courts have said that only LTE is 4G and that for a device to be called 4G it has to be able to connect to Australia's LTE network then so be it, but it still doesn't change the fact that Apple is not lying about the claims of the iPad's capability.

Their lying because their advertising something the majority of Austrlians (and the rest of the world) won't get on the new iPad

Here is what sucks, there are all these different carriers, different speed networks running on various bands and we have to select one carrier in the beginning and sometimes just simply can't change carrier so easily. With these SIM chips, we have to change from one carrier to another, which is kind of a hassle. It certainly would be nice if we didn't have to do it. Personally, the amount of money they are charging for 4G LTE is freaking expensive. IF someone downloads a few 1080p movies a month is going to exceed the most expensive rate listed which increases the cost of downloading a movie. It's one thing to rent or buy it, but to add the outrageous costs of carrier services adds to it. I almost would rather download it from a Wi FI connection if I have a fast ISP, which many people have or can get. Something has to give. I think these 4G LTE carriers are just gouging us now and that HOPEFULLY these monthly charges will go down or they will simply remove the data usage restrictions, which they shouldn't have in the first place.

Look, all the stuff I've seen on AI, Ars, MacRumors, TUAW and so on have been written from a very US-centric perspective. Being an Australian, I thought I'd jump in and clarify just how things work in this country. Whether or not you choose to accept it is another matter. It's clear that we both have our points of view and that we're just going around in circles, so how about we just leave it at that? <handshakes all around>

The Americans also get confused about how networks work outside the US, and that Apple actually sells more devices internationally then there.

Their lying because their advertising something the majority of Austrlians (and the rest of the world) won't get on the new iPad

Except that it does get 4G in Australia (and the rest of the world) according to the ITU's definition. Why is that all of a sudden not an acceptable definition for the rest of the world?

Again, if Australia actually has laws that state you cannot use the ITU's definition of 4G then Apple is in the wrong for the advertising in that country, but they are certainly not lying as there is no statement by Apple that says it's 4G according to Telestra's definition of 4G.

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

In Australia small text at the bottom of the box does NOT excuse a company for false advertising, it just doesn't.
The idea behind this suit isn't to attack apple, it is to protect consumers,
it is very very simple.

PS i just looked at my New iPad 4G box....Yeah.... no warning sticker...the end.

I believe Australia is,the only country where people will buy an NTSC TV knowing that it wouldn't work in that country.

Btw common sense is dead in Australia. I was at a bank and the people were queuing to be served and All of them waited for the word 'next' and if none is forthcoming they just stood in line. So if the teller kept quiet for the next 30 minutes I believe they would just stand there and waiting to be called.

Except that it does get 4G in Australia (and the rest of the world) according to the ITU's definition. Why is that all of a sudden not an acceptable definition for the rest of the world?

Again, if Australia actually has laws that state you cannot use the ITU's definition of 4G then Apple is in the wrong for the advertising in that country, but they are certainly not lying as there is no statement by Apple that says it's 4G according to Telestra's definition of 4G.

I don't know why you're all hung up on the ITU's definition. I don't think it's as important as you make it out to be. Remember, we're talking about consumers here.

No Telco has ever made out HSPA+ to be 4G in Australia. I think that bears repeating.

Except that it does get 4G in Australia (and the rest of the world) according to the ITU's definition. Why is that all of a sudden not an acceptable definition for the rest of the world?

The ITU defines 4G as IMT-Advanced, and considers forerunners such as LTE and WiMax, to also be 4G. They do loosely say evolved 3G technologies may also be considered, but until the revised ITU-R recommendation comes out later this year, no one can confidently say what technologies do and do not constitute evolved 3G technologies.

So you haven't noticed the disclaimers all over Apple's advertising for this? They were the first thing I noticed. In this case the ACCC is wasting tax-payers money protecting no-one.

The following is a disclaimer taken directly from the Apple Store Australia:

"4G coverage is not available in all areas and varies by carrier. See your carrier for details."

With reference to this specific statement, according to the legislation a consumer could reasonably expect that "not available in all areas" infers that 4G is available in at least some areas, which is patently not the case unless, of course, he or she travels internationally.

A reasonable consumer shouldn't have to have a level of technical knowledge above what is considered, well, reasonable to allow them to decipher advertising. If the evidence suggests that it is likely that a reasonable consumer could be mislead then Apple may have a case to answer. Debating frequencies is beside the point. Apple is advertising a Wifi + 4G product which will not connect to 4G in the market in which it is being sold. It need to make this clear so consumers can make an informed choice.

Imagine if all the iMacs sold in the Australian market played only Region 1 DVDs. Even if Apple put this in the fine print, it would, in all likelihood, create a similar problem.

The Trade Practices Act is very powerful piece of legislation, and applies whether you're talking about consumer electronics or breakfast cereal.

I don't know why you're all hung up on the ITU's definition. I don't think it's as important as you make it out to be. Remember, we're talking about consumers here.

No Telco has ever made out HSPA+ to be 4G in Australia. I think that bears repeating.

The ITU has been defining these standards for a long time and the world has followed them, but now we are ignoring the ITU and following the telco's definitions? If the telcos can do it then why not the vendors? Where is the sense in that?

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

The ITU defines 4G as IMT-Advanced, and considers forerunners such as LTE and WiMax, to also be 4G. They do loosely say evolved 3G technologies may also be considered, but until the revised ITU-R recommendation comes out later this year, no one can confidently say what technologies do and do not constitute evolved 3G technologies.

So, strictly speaking, the iPad does not support 4G in Australia.

So much hypocrisy since LTE is an evolved 3G technology.

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

I believe Australia is,the only country where people will buy an NTSC TV knowing that it wouldn't work in that country.

Btw common sense is dead in Australia. I was at a bank and the people were queuing to be served and All of them waited for the word 'next' and if none is forthcoming they just stood in line. So if the teller kept quiet for the next 30 minutes I believe they would just stand there and waiting to be called.

When I bought mine on the opening day the staff were completely up front that there was no proper 4G network in Australia. As others have said: this is a non-story, a beat up by the anti-Apple Australian press and a government intent on distracting everyone from their imminent collapse.

AppleInsider = Apple-in-cider.It's a joke!

I've used macs since 1985 when I typed up my first research paper. Never used anything else never wanted to.

I believe Australia is,the only country where people will buy an NTSC TV knowing that it wouldn't work in that country.

Btw common sense is dead in Australia. I was at a bank and the people were queuing to be served and All of them waited for the word 'next' and if none is forthcoming they just stood in line. So if the teller kept quiet for the next 30 minutes I believe they would just stand there and waiting to be called.

[racist comment removed]

Sad.

Where bouts are you from? if you say America, that would be a very very very sad case of the pot calling the kettle black...

Damn, gotta love 'chainsaw' , ill just leave it to chainsaw to talk, ill just nod & agree, makes so much sense.
A whole lot of armchair experts & keyboard warriors, talking about australian law, armed with cracker jack logic & no education...Its entertaining, until you realise they are being serious, now its sad.

The ITU has been defining these standards for a long time and the world has followed them, but now we are ignoring the ITU and following the telco's definitions? If the telcos can do it then why not the vendors? Where is the sense in that?

I get it. The ITU makes these definitions. The way it is in Australia is simply that HSPA+ is not characterised as 4g in Australia. By ANYONE. Even Apples iPad page calls this technology 3G.

Except that it does get 4G in Australia (and the rest of the world) according to the ITU's definition. Why is that all of a sudden not an acceptable definition for the rest of the world?

The unfortunate situation is, that no one really has cared much for ITU's definition of 4G, ever. Here in Germany (and I think many other parts of the world, including Australia), LTE was always the "next generation" of mobile networks, and thus named 4G, even when the ITU said that only LTE-Advanced would be truly 4G. And when T-Mobile USA and AT&T decided to market their HSPA+ and DC-HSPA networks as 4G, and the ITU changed it's definition accordingly, again it seems no one outside of North America seems to have noticed.

It's a bit ironic that the parent company of T-Mobile USA, Deutsche Telekom, decided to market the "iPad WiFi + 4G" in Germany as "iPad WiFi + SIM", since they feared that confused consumers would believe that an "iPad WiFi + 4G" would run on what DT here calls their 4G network (LTE on 800 MHz and 1800MHz), while it "only" runs on their 42 Mbit/s DC-HSPA network.

Apple by now has at least removed the colorful "4G LTE" icon from its German website, clarified the footnote that the "some territories"(or such) they originally referred to as having 4G connectivity are actually specifically the USA and Canada, and otherwise states that the iPad WiFi + 4G supports "HSPA, HSPA+ and DC-HSPA - the fastest 3G networks in existence".

In short, it's a bit of a messy situation, from a global perspective. I think, the best a company can do in such a situation, is to be very clear about the capabilities by using the terms for technical capabilities that are usually used in the respective country. And by "very clear" I do not necessarily mean a footnote in small print in light grey on white background. It's a matter of showing that you respect your (potential) customers.

Every time this comes up, this thought goes through my head once again: I thought the whole point of LTE (long ago) was supposed to be how worldwide-compatible it was gonna be. What went wrong?

LTE as a standard can't really work worldwide especially considering the provider of LTE in the USA is Verizon, which is a CDMA network. Not many countries still have a CDMA network in operation - many were closed down for GSM.

The truth here is that Apple made the mistake in labelling the models the way they did. Selling something as the iPad wifi+4G indicates to the consumer more than anything that they can get 4G on said device. To have the possibility for 4G not even in one's country stretches the "capable of 4G" argument too far. Most users will never experience the 4G that Apple is describing, so fine print isn't enough. It needs to be up front and centre, all references to 4G shouldn't be on these devices.

Apple has built an enormous user base and with that user base comes trust. Many people who buy Apple products are not technologically savvy. It's the reason many people buy their products - they just work. When people bought the iPhone 3G, they knew they were getting a device capable of 3G in their country. Regardless of any fine print, the regular consumer of any country could not be made to realise that their iPad with 4G in its title in fact can't do 4G in their country simply by some fine print. People near me in line on release day didn't know 4G wasn't available here using this iPad, and many in the line probably didn't. You can't raise a generation of people on Apple devices and not expect to think for them. It goes hand in hand with Apple products.

The ACCC are just doing their duty to the Australian community by bringing product sellers into line with the law. Not doing so would make them irresponsible. They simply want Apple to correct their local advertising to remove references to 4G because it doesn't exist in the country at these standards. These come with mandatory fines they can't simply shrug off because it's Apple. As was stated in the Australian news this morning, the ACCC has won harder cases in the past - for example, 3D TV's were sold around the country before football season, with the promise of 3D content. The fine print stated that the 3D content was only available in capital cities, but this was not spoken in the adds nor prominent enough in its (fine) print to communicate this appropriately to potential consumers.

People from the USA (whom I assume are the bulk of the people here calling us Australians idiots) seem to forget that in their country, the consumer can't make a mistake, not because they're more intelligent - but due to the fact that no matter what 4G model they buy, be it Verizon or AT&T, they're going to be able to get 4G. People in countries which aren't locked into a carrier have to think harder about these things, and they shouldn't have to rely on limited fine print to tell them no, when the title of the damn device tells them otherwise.

Heaven forbid your precious Apple can do something wrong. The fanboyism here is out of control. The USA is the king of dumbness when it comes to lawsuits. Look at yourselves first before projecting onto others.

For the record, while all the fans that share a common interest of Apple products squabble with each other over the definition of 4G in various regions, this entire thing was started when Samsung complained to the ACCC two weeks ago about Apple's 4G claims for the new iPad.

Surprised?

Let's keep our eye on the common enemy before we start fighting amongst ourselves.

Steve Job's vision was so forward thinking that he used to park in disabled spots before he became sick.

For the record, while all the fans that share a common interest of Apple products squabble with each other over the definition of 4G in various regions, this entire thing was started when Samsung complained to the ACCC two weeks ago about Apple's 4G claims for the new iPad.

Surprised?

Let's keep our eye on the common enemy before we start fighting amongst ourselves.

LOL. the "common enemy" has its name on half of the guts of the device you're typing on.

LOL. the "common enemy" has its name on half of the guts of the device you're typing on.

Extremely relevant point.

Samsung are responsible for a portion of the iPad's components so, despite everything that has happened, and continues to happen in courts around the world, they could never be considered the common-enemy?

Nice leap of logic.

Here's an interesting question for you:

If Samsung are responsible for 'half the guts of a device' that's seeing such an astounding worldwide success, then why are they experiencing such difficulty completing the other half and bringing out their iPad-killer?

Steve Job's vision was so forward thinking that he used to park in disabled spots before he became sick.

The unfortunate situation is, that no one really has cared much for ITU's definition of 4G, ever. Here in Germany (and I think many other parts of the world, including Australia), LTE was always the "next generation" of mobile networks, and thus named 4G, even when the ITU said that only LTE-Advanced would be truly 4G. And when T-Mobile USA and AT&T decided to market their HSPA+ and DC-HSPA networks as 4G, and the ITU changed it's definition accordingly, again it seems no one outside of North America seems to have noticed.

It's a bit ironic that the parent company of T-Mobile USA, Deutsche Telekom, decided to market the "iPad WiFi + 4G" in Germany as "iPad WiFi + SIM", since they feared that confused consumers would believe that an "iPad WiFi + 4G" would run on what DT here calls their 4G network (LTE on 800 MHz and 1800MHz), while it "only" runs on their 42 Mbit/s DC-HSPA network.

Apple by now has at least removed the colorful "4G LTE" icon from its German website, clarified the footnote that the "some territories"(or such) they originally referred to as having 4G connectivity are actually specifically the USA and Canada, and otherwise states that the iPad WiFi + 4G supports "HSPA, HSPA+ and DC-HSPA - the fastest 3G networks in existence".

In short, it's a bit of a messy situation, from a global perspective. I think, the best a company can do in such a situation, is to be very clear about the capabilities by using the terms for technical capabilities that are usually used in the respective country. And by "very clear" I do not necessarily mean a footnote in small print in light grey on white background. It's a matter of showing that you respect your (potential) customers.

If the ITU has allowed the 4G standards to include LTE, WiMax, AND HSPA+, and the new iPad will work on HSPA+ networks in Australia, then by international definition, it's a 4G device. It sounds like Australia has set their laws on a certain technology being the only one they will accept as 4G, and now have a hurt-butt because Apple hasn't bent over backwards to accommodate their laws.

If Australia were to deem that all 'automobiles' had to run on diesel, would GM be sued for selling a Holden that runs on gasoline and calling it an 'automobile', even though that is internationally understood?

If the ITU has allowed the 4G standards to include LTE, WiMax, AND HSPA+, and the new iPad will work on HSPA+ networks in Australia, then by international definition, it's a 4G device. It sounds like Australia has set their laws on a certain technology being the only one they will accept as 4G, and now have a hurt-butt because Apple hasn't bent over backwards to accommodate their laws.

If Australia were to deem that all 'automobiles' had to run on diesel, would GM be sued for selling a Holden that runs on gasoline and calling it an 'automobile', even though that is internationally understood?

You apparently didn't bother to read the quote in the post just above yours. It makes eminent sense IMO, while also explaining this isn't unique to Australia.

This is so dumb, anybody with a brain would realize that the iPad is 4G capable, it has 4G modem circuitry inside, that means IF THERE IS a 4G network available, it will operate at 4G speed. A consumer should know that the Australian networks are not 4G LTE before they buy the iPad....they could take it on a trip to the USA anytime and use it on America's 4G LTE networks -- the iPad IS 4G-capable!! yes....but if the network infrastructure is not there to support it, that functionality will not work. This should be known from the start, this is NOT some con by Apple, it is just simply ignorant, uneducated consumers who don't know anything about electronics or wireless technology or how networks work and operate. The EQUIPMENT (towers, antennas, and routers) have to be in place for a 4G network to work, and that kind of network simply isn't being offered in Aussie-land yet. But the 4G iPad IS a 4G iPad true and true. No deception by Apple.

[insults removed]. There is a Telstra LTE tower with 3km of where I live. I can buy LTE USB stick, LTE to wifi router, LTE phones. All in Australia.

The labelling, branding and advertising is incorrect but I would question if it is deceiving. It does not say that it WILL work with Telstra's LTE, that would be deceiving. 3G iPhones in Australia do not work on all towers, regional Optus bands were incompatible with the 3G and 3GS.

Regardless it is an issue, the product is incorrectly labelled for its actual functionality in the market.

I can only imagine the screaming that would be going on in this forum if the iPad did not work on USA carriers LTE bands, actually I do not need to imagine, only look back to the bitching when the iPhone 3G was released in the USA and it was carrier limited, with a limited amount of 3G towers and poor coverage.

Actually your "non story", "non issue" created class action suits, bad media and 1000's of comment posts complaining. The ACCC has pointed out something and asked for appropriate changes. No law suits from Australian individuals, no stream of bitching and threats.

Thankfully I am a robust Australian, not the bunch of gold fish memory, foul mouthed brain failures from the USA that complained so viciously when the shoe was on their foot.

Btw common sense is dead in Australia. I was at a bank and the people were queuing to be served and All of them waited for the word 'next' and if none is forthcoming they just stood in line. So if the teller kept quiet for the next 30 minutes I believe they would just stand there and waiting to be called.

"Being polite" might be a new concept for you but keep at it and you'll adjust.

In Australia small text at the bottom of the box does NOT excuse a company for false advertising, it just doesn't.
The idea behind this suit isn't to attack apple, it is to protect consumers,
it is very very simple.

PS i just looked at my New iPad 4G box....Yeah.... no warning sticker...the end.

You better run you better take cover....er you better get a refund I meant.

If the ITU has allowed the 4G standards to include LTE, WiMax, AND HSPA+, and the new iPad will work on HSPA+ networks in Australia, then by international definition, it's a 4G device. It sounds like Australia has set their laws on a certain technology being the only one they will accept as 4G, and now have a hurt-butt because Apple hasn't bent over backwards to accommodate their laws.

If Australia were to deem that all 'automobiles' had to run on diesel, would GM be sued for selling a Holden that runs on gasoline and calling it an 'automobile', even though that is internationally understood?

FYIYou'd be hard pressed to find an Australian car running on "gasoline". Aussie cars run on "petrol".

This entire thread is ridiculous, because the ethereal definition of 4G is ridiculous. HSPA+ is technically 4G and my iPhone 4S has been running on it since launch day. Someone needs to nail these standards down.

I'm very happy with my new iPad. It's a million times better than any other device with a similar form factor.

[insults removed] There is a Telstra LTE tower with 3km of where I live. I can buy LTE USB stick, LTE to wifi router, LTE phones. All in Australia.

The labelling, branding and advertising is incorrect but I would question if it is deceiving. It does not say that it WILL work with Telstra's LTE, that would be deceiving. 3G iPhones in Australia do not work on all towers, regional Optus bands were incompatible with the 3G and 3GS.

Regardless it is an issue, the product is incorrectly labelled for its actual functionality in the market.

I can only imagine the screaming that would be going on in this forum if the iPad did not work on USA carriers LTE bands, actually I do not need to imagine, only look back to the bitching when the iPhone 3G was released in the USA and it was carrier limited, with a limited amount of 3G towers and poor coverage.

Actually your "non story", "non issue" created class action suits, bad media and 1000's of comment posts complaining. The ACCC has pointed out something and asked for appropriate changes. No law suits from Australian individuals, no stream of bitching and threats.

Thankfully I am a robust Australian, not the bunch of gold fish memory, foul mouthed brain failures from the USA that complained so viciously when the shoe was on their foot.

Damn Straight!!!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Granmastak

You better run you better take cover....er you better get a refund I meant.